winalski%tle.DEC@decwrl.DEC.COM (12/22/85)
From: winalski%tle.DEC@decwrl.DEC.COM (Paul S. Winalski) Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary defines 'trilogy' as follows: a series of three dramas or sometimes three literary or musical compositions that although each is in one sense complete are closely related and develop a single theme By this definition, neither THE LORD OF THE RINGS nor THE BOOK OF THE NEW SUN is a trilogy or tetralogy. Rather, these are single stories published in multiple volumes. The individual volumes of LOTR cannot stand alone as complete stories. On the other hand, the Xanth books, the Riverworld series, and the Hitchhikers tetralogy *do* fit the definition. --PSW
msb@lsuc.UUCP (Mark Brader) (01/01/86)
> Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary defines 'trilogy' as follows: > > a series of three dramas or sometimes three literary or > musical compositions that although each is in one sense > complete are closely related and develop a single theme > > By this definition, neither THE LORD OF THE RINGS nor THE BOOK OF THE > NEW SUN is a trilogy or tetralogy. Rather, these are single stories > published in multiple volumes. ... And, of course, the so-called FOUNDATION trilogy also was not one. It was a series of NINE closely related stories that happened to fill three volumes of the size then considered convenient. (The first one was written especially for the book publication, and the others had appeared in order in Astounding or Analog, whatever it was then called.) Mark Brader